Topic: Without Prejudice 2 (Read 575881 times)

armand · « **Reply #1880 on:** September 05, 2016, 09:25:12 pm »

Geese

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1881 on:** September 10, 2016, 06:02:50 pm »

Omar, the video operator, tonight just before the show when there was still some light...

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1882 on:** September 10, 2016, 06:05:40 pm »

Then a little later, when the technical constraints were getting stretched just a little

Rob C · « **Reply #1883 on:** September 11, 2016, 04:55:58 am »

Two great images Graham. The second one brings me to Sarah Moon thinking! Love the confusion of planes. You have a very keen eye!

Rob C

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1884 on:** September 11, 2016, 06:49:18 am »

Thanks Rob: it's funny how if the light is a little imperfect, I much prefer to go B&W. But once it's really putrid, it's best to roll with the lurid abstraction.
I actually wish I knew how all those swirly things happened in the background of the second; I was just sweating on getting some sort of focus in the near dark, the focus assist doesn't work too well with a 200mm.

Here's another, with a brighter palate:

Rob C · « **Reply #1885 on:** September 11, 2016, 09:24:16 am »

Quote from: GrahamBy on September 11, 2016, 06:49:18 am

Thanks Rob: it's funny how if the light is a little imperfect, I much prefer to go B&W. But once it's really putrid, it's best to roll with the lurid abstraction.
I actually wish I knew how all those swirly things happened in the background of the second; I was just sweating on getting some sort of focus in the near dark, the focus assist doesn't work too well with a 200mm.

Here's another, with a brighter palate:

I don't think that 'bright' one has got it. Those burned out flowers in the foregrund draw the eye too strongly - maybe not for non-photographers, though.

I won't say any more because then I'd be abusing my own stipulations about this thread! I only said what I said above because you and I both know you have done some bloody good work across genres.

Rob

P.S. That's a very confusing neckline that outfit of hers has! I'm trying to figure out how you cross-dress a bra strap with a frock! But maybe it's all a single garment - a trompe l'oeil! Interesting.

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1886 on:** September 11, 2016, 10:03:09 am »

Definitely some weaving between bra and dress there, yes...

Rob C · « **Reply #1887 on:** September 11, 2016, 10:41:08 am »

From last month, reminding me I must get out more. (I don't think I posted it before, but you never know.) But hey, the terrace varnishing is finished at long last - did the outer face of the french windows this morning! All that remains now - for this year - is three outer sets of shutters (probably the windows, too...).

Actually washed the car the other day - must be the first time in at least three or four weeks - and found that it was still black beneath the brown. Two nights later, it rained. Sahara rain. I may do the windscreen tomorrow so that I can see the road.

Rob

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1888 on:** September 11, 2016, 11:34:28 am »

Ha, today I drove halfway to Geneva (well, more like 1/3) to pick up a printer. I had promised myself an pro1000 at the end of the year if I was good

... and this one was for sale 300€ off, box never opened. The story: a Brazilian living in Geneva for 15 years started feeling the call of the sea, so he bought a boat.

And the engine broke.

He showed me his Mamiya C330 and his Nikon 6x9... hopefully they won't have to go when the mast snaps

But he had found my photos online and was happy to be selling to a photographer and not an architect. He seemed a very happy chap, in fact

I printed out the "bright" pic. Definitely less impressive than the darker ones, but I think it still works better at 13x19 than on screen: there seems to be a better balance between the green and the pink. That was after pushing and pulling at the curve a bit, although burnt is burnt. It's my baby of course, so I would say that

Rob C · « **Reply #1889 on:** September 11, 2016, 02:13:26 pm »

Quote from: GrahamBy on September 11, 2016, 11:34:28 am

Ha, today I drove halfway to Geneva (well, more like 1/3) to pick up a printer. I had promised myself an pro1000 at the end of the year if I was good ... and this one was for sale 300€ off, box never opened. The story: a Brazilian living in Geneva for 15 years started feeling the call of the sea, so he bought a boat.

And the engine broke.

He showed me his Mamiya C330 and his Nikon 6x9... hopefully they won't have to go when the mast snaps

But he had found my photos online and was happy to be selling to a photographer and not an architect. He seemed a very happy chap, in fact

I printed out the "bright" pic. Definitely less impressive than the darker ones, but I think it still works better at 13x19 than on screen: there seems to be a better balance between the green and the pink. That was after pushing and pulling at the curve a bit, although burnt is burnt. It's my baby of course, so I would say that

What was that, when it was born? (Nikon 6x9.)

Rob

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1890 on:** September 11, 2016, 03:45:18 pm »

No idea, I'd never seen one before. They were both in as-new condition. I was having a bit of a nostalgia trip, first time I'd looked through a double-image range-finder since my father's M3.

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1891 on:** September 12, 2016, 05:02:18 am »

So I keep walking around the print of the "brighter palette" and trying to decide if it works or not. From some angles yes, some no. Strange but interesting.

Here's another from the same series...

Riaan van Wyk · « **Reply #1892 on:** September 15, 2016, 06:48:03 am »

Shower scene.

I haven't posted for so long that I had to look where the attach photo tab is!

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1893 on:** September 15, 2016, 08:55:52 am »

Quote from: Rob C on September 11, 2016, 02:13:26 pm

What was that, when it was born? (Nikon 6x9.)

Can't find any evidence that such a camera ever existed. Maybe I hallucinated that it was a Nikon? That it was 6x9 is certain, I was impressed by needing four strokes of the film-advance to cock the shutter. It was black and quite slim, without any sort of pop-out bellows..

I think it must have been the Fuji :
http://antiquecameras.net/fuji6x76x9.html

Rob C · « **Reply #1894 on:** September 15, 2016, 02:55:05 pm »

Quote from: GrahamBy on September 15, 2016, 08:55:52 am

Can't find any evidence that such a camera ever existed. Maybe I hallucinated that it was a Nikon? That it was 6x9 is certain, I was impressed by needing four strokes of the film-advance to cock the shutter. It was black and quite slim, without any sort of pop-out bellows..

I think it must have been the Fuji :
http://antiquecameras.net/fuji6x76x9.html

Yeah, I did the trawl too, and came up empty.

But you may not be hallucinating entirely: Nikon did seem to make lenses for other camera companies.

Rob

muntanela · « **Reply #1895 on:** September 16, 2016, 06:01:13 pm »

Achenes of Carlina acaulis and Geum reptans.

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1896 on:** September 17, 2016, 06:50:32 pm »

Lyon today...

Rob C · « **Reply #1897 on:** September 18, 2016, 04:34:07 am »

Quote from: GrahamBy on September 17, 2016, 06:50:32 pm

Lyon today...

Now that is ambiguity with a cool bokeh!

Rob

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1898 on:** September 18, 2016, 06:43:24 am »

So, a little more invasive that I like to be. A very austerely dressed women outside Cathédrale St George as mass came out and the faithful mixed with the tourists...

GrahamBy · « **Reply #1899 on:** September 18, 2016, 06:47:06 am »

Quote from: Rob C on September 18, 2016, 04:34:07 am

Now that is ambiguity with a cool bokeh!

It's your passion for knitwear showing through

Author Topic: Without Prejudice 2 (Read 575881 times)